wlaidlaw Posted November 26, 2015 Share #1 Posted November 26, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I had thought that the SF 58 and 24 flashes worked OK but that was before I tried to use them in fixed ISO mode, where they still flash but the shutter speed is wrong. If say you have set up the slow speed synchronisation to be a fixed 1/125 of a second, which eliminates other variables (lens focal length, ambient light etc), then when you turn on the flash, the camera's shutter speed should always default to a fixed 1/125, like it does on the M240. Now this does happen if you are in auto ISO, with a fixed 1/125 showing up. However, it does not happen in fixed ISO, where the shutter speed sets for the ambient light for whatever aperture and ISO you have selected. In a dimly lit room, this might be a quite slow shutter speed. The auto ISO seems to default to 50 ISO all the time, while the flash is connected. I never shoot flash with auto ISO but always fixed as otherwise, the results can be far from what you expect and you no longer have control. This BTW is all in aperture mode, as I want to control my DOF. I would be very interested to hear whether others can reproduce this bug or is it limited to my camera? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 26, 2015 Posted November 26, 2015 Hi wlaidlaw, Take a look here Bug in Flash system - shutter speed wrongly set. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ramarren Posted November 26, 2015 Share #2 Posted November 26, 2015 Hmm. That's not the way I use a dedicated flash. Normally, when I fit a dedicated, TTL metering flash unit, I set the camera's exposure system to Manual mode, set my baseline exposure for the ambient light (typically ISO 100-200 and 1/30 to 1/125 second for most indoor situations), then use the aperture and the flash exposure compensation dials to manipulate and balance the focus zone and the flash unit's response. Using Aperture priority mode has never worked well for any other auto-flash system, in my experience. I'm surprised that it would for the M. But then, I don't have any Leica dedicated flash units yet, never used one of any of my Leica cameras. The only dedicated flash unit I have at present is an Olympus FL-36 which I use with the E-1 and E-M1. It works well as I described; the Canon and Nikon systems I had in the past worked the same way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted November 26, 2015 Author Share #3 Posted November 26, 2015 Aperture priority works just fine on the M and the manual implies it does on the SL as well but it doesn't. On the M your speed is either set to a fixed figure which you dial in on the menu or the inverse of the focal length or double the focal length of whatever lens you have mounted. If you can use the flash for daylight fill in, only the floor shutter speed is set but if the ambient light is high enough, the shutter speed will be higher, so that over-exposure does not occur. It all works very well. The one real no-no is using auto ISO, as then you never know were you are - one variable too many and the variables can fight against each other. On the M, it is in reality a modified aperture priority with an element of fixed shutter speed added in. It is only where the ambient light would be higher than that provided by the flash, that true aperture priority then takes over from fixed shutter speed for that lens. Its a very clever system that in well lit rooms for daytime weddings, gives close to foolproof results, especially with the SF-58D. Probably for me, less than 1 shot in 30 with less than perfect exposure. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted November 26, 2015 Share #4 Posted November 26, 2015 Interesting. I've got an SF40 on order, when it comes in I'll have to experiment with it on both cameras. I've not found Aperture priority a successful way to use dedicated flash before, but there's always a first time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted November 27, 2015 Share #5 Posted November 27, 2015 This behaviour may or may not be a bug but in any case, I always use manual mode with the flash. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted November 27, 2015 Author Share #6 Posted November 27, 2015 This behaviour may or may not be a bug but in any case, I always use manual mode with the flash. I would assume it should work like the M240 which it does not and further, it does not work as described in the manual, where it talks about setting the floor shutter speed as a fixed value or based on lens focal length. In practice in a dark room on fixed ISO, the shutter speed is going way below the floor speed. It certainly should never force you to use auto ISO, which is just wrong for flash. As if the photocell decides more light is needed, what does the camera do - increase the ISO or up the output/duration of the flash...... errrr ummm let me think....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted November 27, 2015 Share #7 Posted November 27, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) it does not work as described in the manual, where it talks about setting the floor shutter speed as a fixed value or based on lens focal length. The English version of the manual states that you can select a slowest shutter speed while the German version claims you can select a fastest speed (“kürzeste Verschlusszeit”), so there you are. More often than not, the SL manual is less than helpful. My recommendation of M mode stands. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted November 27, 2015 Author Share #8 Posted November 27, 2015 The English version of the manual states that you can select a slowest shutter speed while the German version claims you can select a fastest speed (“kürzeste Verschlusszeit”), so there you are. More often than not, the SL manual is less than helpful. My recommendation of M mode stands. What does the German version of the M240 manual say out of interest. Setting say a fixed flash speed of 1/125 means that on the M240, you will never see a shutter speed of different to this, when an active flash is attached. As I mentioned above, fill in daylight flash works very well on the M240 in Aperture priority, although I normally set the floor/lowest speed to 1/focal length rather than fixed value. Thus for a 50mm lens, the slowest shutter speed you should see is 1/50th of a second. If the light value is lower than this, then the power of the flash is increased. When you are taking a wedding where you want daylight flash fill in, you really don't have time to use manual. I do use manual in near total darkness, where I have more time to get the set up correct and then set the shutter speed to flash on the speed knob (1/180 for the M240). On the SL in aperture priority and Fixed ISO, it really is not working at all. It neither sets a minimum nor maximum speed so both the German AND English versions of the manual are wrong. In reality it is the camera which is wrong. I just set 1/125 fixed flash speed and 3200 ISO, with the SF-58D flash mounted and on in TTL mode. I have seen speeds as high as 1/2000S pointing the camera outside and as low as 1/2S pointing the camera into a dark corner and shutting the aperture down. There is no way this can be correct. You cannot use a flash at 1/2000 sec, as the chances of the shutter being open when the flash fires are close to zero. Irrespective of whether folks think you should use the camera in manual for flash or not, it should still work in aperture priority. I am more than a little surprised this was not picked up in the testing phase. It is an argument for spreading the beta cameras more widely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted November 27, 2015 Author Share #9 Posted November 27, 2015 Update. Leica were aware there was a problem with both the SF-24D and 58D on the Q but had not realised that this problem had been duplicated in the SL. I am having a meeting with Leica UK on the 9th of December to show them the problem in action, as they no longer have either a 24 or 58 in stock to try it themselves. I suggested that maybe it was time to release the mythical firmware update for the 58, which we were promised, when it first came out but never materialised. I suspect for me, it will mean buying a SF64. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted November 27, 2015 Share #10 Posted November 27, 2015 Again, interesting. Thanks for the update! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budfox Posted December 20, 2015 Share #11 Posted December 20, 2015 Wilson - I am a bit confused as to the practical difference between using TTL flash with A-priority and a fixed shutter speed (via sync menu) and fixed ISO, compared to just using full manual mode? In the former, are you not simply fixing aperture, shutter speed and ISO and letting the flash vary according to the light. How is this different to manual mode? I do acknowledge the existence of the variable-ISO 50 bug however. I also note that the SL flash sync menu options linked to focal length fix a range of shutter speed between either 1/60 and 1/f, or 1/60 and 1/2f, and this might provide a minimal increase in flexibility over manual mode depending on the lens. My main gripe with the flash system is that there is no straight forward all auto-TTL 'set and forget' mode like most other systems. It would be good to have that option used with the P exposure mode and forced flash to get auto fill flash in daylight (or other situations). As it stands, using P mode with flash on the SL does not force the use of flash, it still depends on the ambient light. You have to use a more complex T, A or M mode to force the use of flash. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted December 21, 2015 Share #12 Posted December 21, 2015 Wilson - I am a bit confused as to the practical difference between using TTL flash with A-priority and a fixed shutter speed (via sync menu) and fixed ISO, compared to just using full manual mode? In the former, are you not simply fixing aperture, shutter speed and ISO and letting the flash vary according to the light. How is this different to manual mode? [...] Manual mode in this case usually refers to the flash's behavior, and has nothing to do with the camera settings. Essentially it means 'Flash, do as I set; do nothing but flash' (at the power setting you choose). In essence, you are in full control - and on your own. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted December 21, 2015 Author Share #13 Posted December 21, 2015 Wilson - I am a bit confused as to the practical difference between using TTL flash with A-priority and a fixed shutter speed (via sync menu) and fixed ISO, compared to just using full manual mode? In the former, are you not simply fixing aperture, shutter speed and ISO and letting the flash vary according to the light. How is this different to manual mode? I do acknowledge the existence of the variable-ISO 50 bug however. I also note that the SL flash sync menu options linked to focal length fix a range of shutter speed between either 1/60 and 1/f, or 1/60 and 1/2f, and this might provide a minimal increase in flexibility over manual mode depending on the lens. My main gripe with the flash system is that there is no straight forward all auto-TTL 'set and forget' mode like most other systems. It would be good to have that option used with the P exposure mode and forced flash to get auto fill flash in daylight (or other situations). As it stands, using P mode with flash on the SL does not force the use of flash, it still depends on the ambient light. You have to use a more complex T, A or M mode to force the use of flash. If you are working hard on a shoot and taking many shots, you will often be altering your aperture to get different depths of focus from shot to shot, either to have a varying amount of background in view or to isolate the subjects. If you constantly have to reset the flash, when using in Automatic setting as well as altering the camera, it all just takes too long on an intensive shoot. This is particularly the case if you are starting towards the end of natural daylight, where you are using the flash as fill in and then going on to where the flash is the main lighting. The level of ambient lighting can vary from shot to shot and this is is where the slow sync feature with TTL, as it operates on the M240, excels. Yes of course I could use M or A flash settings but I have paid for a camera and flash that are both supposed to have full TTL/GNC flash control and at the moment it does not work properly, with multiple bugs. Leica UK agree it is not correct and are not sure if it ever will be with the SF24/26/58 generation flashes. I hope the 58 can be rescued with a firmware update on the flash but I would guess this is somewhat less than a 50/50 chance. I am pessimistic that anything can be done for the SF24/26. I suspect I will be buying a type 64 flash when it comes out and I am just hoping that that will not display the same bugs. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budfox Posted December 21, 2015 Share #14 Posted December 21, 2015 I do note from the original product press release for the SF58 dated February 18, 2009: 'The Leica SF58 is equipped with an integrated USB port to allow convenient uploading of firmware updates, ensuring absolute compatibility with future generations of Leica cameras.' Pretty unambiguous statement I think? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted December 21, 2015 Author Share #15 Posted December 21, 2015 I do note from the original product press release for the SF58 dated February 18, 2009: 'The Leica SF58 is equipped with an integrated USB port to allow convenient uploading of firmware updates, ensuring absolute compatibility with future generations of Leica cameras.' Pretty unambiguous statement I think? The practical aspect is that the SF58D was designed and manufactured by Metz, which went into administration. There is a successor company http://www.metz-mecatech.de but I don't know how much responsibility they are assuming for legacy products (as little as they feel they can get away with, would be my guess). My feeling is that Leica would have to pay them to write new firmware, even if the problem is sortable with a firmware update, which it may not be. As Leica, not unnaturally, want us to buy the new 40 and 64 flashes, I think they would only do that, if they received a request from many SF58D owners. I have asked Leica to implement this. The rest is up to other owners to contact Leica to request/demand this update for the 58. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budfox Posted December 21, 2015 Share #16 Posted December 21, 2015 Thanks Wilson - noted and will see what I can do! I won't complaint too much as Leica has been excellent so far in terms of camera support (including out of warranty repairs for free). My last question on this topic of flash - the specs for the SL state that it supports all sorts of flash modes e.g. Auto, red eye reduction, manual etc. None of these options exist in the current menus, nor directly on the SF26 or SF58. Does anyone have any insights about, say, how to use red-eye reduction on the SL (other than waiting for the SL64 and seeing if it is included in that). I understand that with a decent enough and tall enough flash you would ideally not use it. But I am intrigued about the specs advertising such features that do not seem to actually exist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budfox Posted December 21, 2015 Share #17 Posted December 21, 2015 Correction to above - I accept that auto and manual do exist on the SF58 flash - it's a question about red-eye reduction and reliance on the spec sheet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted December 21, 2015 Share #18 Posted December 21, 2015 IMHO, Leica is entirely uninformed regarding how flash should work. It is apparent in its documentation and implementation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted December 22, 2015 Share #19 Posted December 22, 2015 I do note from the original product press release for the SF58 dated February 18, 2009: 'The Leica SF58 is equipped with an integrated USB port to allow convenient uploading of firmware updates, ensuring absolute compatibility with future generations of Leica cameras.' Pretty unambiguous statement I think? I agree that this is unambiguous, and Leica has ""ensured" compatibility with future generations of Leica cameras." It is not as if the SF58 was released in 1960 and perhaps it would be unreasonable to assume 50+ years of compatibility. It is only a few years old, and already the promise of compatibility will have been broken unless Leica figures out a way to have a firmware update issued. Metz may have to be paid to write it, but that should not be the customers' problem. As a SF58 owner with a SL on order, I am most interested in having this resolved. If the firmware cannot be updated, Leica ought to offer SF58 owners the ability to trade in for a SF64 at a reduced price. What does "ensure" mean? Or will Leica say it was just marketing fluff? That would be quite disappointing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share #20 Posted December 22, 2015 Alan, On your point on a good trade in price, I have already mentioned an exchange discount arrangement in a discussion with Leica. I didn't get a "no" but more of a "wait and see what can be sorted with the 58". It may be that the fault does not lie with the 58 at all but in the implementation in the SL. As Pico says, Flash is a weird and wonderful world as far as Leica is concerned. One person at Leica UK said that he thought the 58 could never work on the SL, as its pin configuration was different. I had to explain that Leica used the Nikon/Minolta pattern pin-out and this had not changed since I think, the early days of the R. Should the 58 not be able to be updated, I am certainly prepared negotiate hard on behalf of all, for an attractive discount deal on a 64. I would guess this will have to wait until the 64 comes out, when we can then see if the problem lies in the flash or the body. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.